MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W801597244

The role of social cues in the involuntary attribution of intentionality.

2009· dissertation· en· W801597244 sur OpenAlex
Matthew Hudson

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueRepository@Hull (Worktribe) (University of Hull) · 2009
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiquePsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesBangor UniversityTrent UniversityNottingham Trent UniversityUniversity of Hull
Mots-clésIntentionalityAttributionPsychologyCognitive psychologySocial psychologyEpistemologyPhilosophy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Predicting the behavior of others is crucial in social interactions and requires sophisticated cognitive mechanisms with which to do so. In order to make a more informed prediction, it is necessary to integrate information about the mental state and intentions of the actor with the perception of the action itself. The aim of this thesis was to investigate in what way social cues that convey another person's goals and intentions contribute to an observer's anticipation of that person's actions.The first three experiments used a representational momentum paradigm to test the hypothesis that judgments of how far another agent's head has rotated are influenced by the perceived gaze direction of that agent. Participants observed a video-clip of a face rotating 60⁰ towards them starting from the left or right profile view. The gaze direction of the face was either congruent with, ahead of, or lagging behind the angle of rotation. Following this, two static faces, at varying angles of rotation with respect to the end-point angle of the face in the video-clip, were presented simultaneously. The task of the participants was to decide which of the two heads was at an angle best resembling the angle of the end-point of the moving face. The critical test condition consisted of one test face oriented at 10⁰ before, and the other at 10⁰ after the end-point.In experiment 1 the gaze-lagging condition elicited a significant underestimation of the rotation compared to the "congruent" and "ahead" gaze conditions. Participants did not exhibit similar biases when judging the rotation of several non-face control stimuli with visual features that mimicked different aspects of gaze direction, in particular the configuration of black and white components and the directional information it conveys. In experiment 2, the stimuli were spatially inverted to disrupt the integration of gaze direction and head rotation. Under these circumstances there was no effect of social cues on action anticipation, while presentation in an upright orientation replicated the effect observed in experiment 1. In experiment 3 the effect of gaze persisted when the actor expressed an avoidance motivation (fear, disgust) but not when expressing an approach motivation (happiness, anger). As the goal of an action that moves toward the observer with an avoidance expression is ambiguous but is unambiguous when expressing approach, it is concluded that the use of gaze as a cue to the end-point of the action is flexible and depends on the perceived ambiguity of the agent's behavioural intentions.Experiment 4 assessed the role that social cues have in attributing the intentions of an individual. Furthermore, it looked at whether this capacity is related to individual differences in empathising, systemising and the extent to which participants possess autistic-like traits. Participants completed a gaze cueing experiment in which a centrally presented gaze averted to the left or right preceded the appearance of a target in either the gazed at location (valid) or on the opposite side of the screen (invalid). The difference in target detection times between valid and invalid trials is a measure of how quickly an observer is able to orient their attention in the direction that someone is looking. The speed with which participant's oriented attention in response to the gaze direction was expected to depend on the intentions attributed to the identity. Participants initially completed a learning phase in which the three identities were presented. The gaze and expression of the identities was such that one conveyed a prosocial intention, one conveyed an antisocial intention and one was spatially predictive of target location. It was found that those with high empathising skills and few autistic traits showed a smaller cueing effect in response to the gaze of the antisocial identity than the prosocial identity. Those with more autistic traits and systemising skills showed a larger cueing effect in response to the gaze of the predictive identity. This suggests that both groups were able to orient attention in response to gaze direction, but that they prioritised different aspects of the gazers intentions. Those who are more sensitive to social information learnt the social intentions of the individual and this decreased the cueing effect in response to a negative identity. Those less sensitive to social information but more sensitive to spatial regularities learnt that one identity was spatially predictive and consequently increased the cueing effect in response to the gaze direction of that identity.Overall, these studies suggest that social cues are automatically integrated in the representations of the perceived actions of others, and contribute to anticipations of how they will behave in the immediate future. This plays a crucial role in Theory of Mind and in enabling us to successfully interact with others.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,868
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,646

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,028
Tête enseignante GPT0,238
Écart entre enseignants0,210 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle